10x

Jewelry of the 'Shadows'

When my first son was very young and very sick and spending too much time in operating rooms and intensive care, I sought a diversion to distract him from what was happening. Portable DVD players were just becoming available. So what we landed on was watching movies--specifically, the classic monster movies by Universal: Frankenstein, Dracula, the Hunchback, The Mummy, the Wolf Man and so on. Lying together on his gurney in those rooms, we screened film after film. We bought matching action figure collectables. We tuned out all the negativity going on around us.

An unintended side effect was--after we had gotten past those hard times--that we had turned our son into a horror genre junkie. Several years later, then, we embarked on an associated journey that has lasted years now.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, television produced a soap opera that centered on the supernatural. "Dark Shadows" had begun as a somewhat normal soap with a Gothic-romantic theme. But when it attracted only limited audiences and faced cancellation, producer Dan Curtis took a leap that could only have been broached in those early days of television. He introduced a vampire, who quickly captured the imagination of, predominantly, America's youth and went on to become the main character, resuscitating the show in the process. As months passed, vampire Barnabas Collins was joined by a closet-full of ghosts, werewolves, witches, zombies, warlocks, demons and other creatures of the night--a child's lurid delight!

Now, Dark Shadows' legacy has been revitalized by Tim Burton's Hollywood feature starring Johnny Depp (who, by the way, started his career with a supporting role in the horror classic "Nightmare on Elm Street" and is a self-avowed Dark Shadows fan).

What's exceptional for our business is the starring role played in Dark Shadows by fine jewelry. In fact, jewelry was the very plot element used to usher the vampire into the show. Willie Loomis, a con man living in the Victorian Maine mansion of the wealthy Collins family, learned that family ancestors had historically embraced the practice of being buried with their jewelry. His next step, of course, was to break into the Collins mausoleum and begin prying open coffins. Two centuries earlier, the vampire had been locked and chained in a coffin in a secret room by his father. When Loomis raised that lid, out came Barnabas and his fury.

Over subsequent episodes (1225 in total, all of which my son and I have personally viewed, many twice--Dark Shadows enjoys the status of having been the only soap opera ever to have had every single episode recorded), jewelry continued to take center stage--pendants and amulets, silver pentagrams; the vampire's ring itself was of such notoriety it launched an early version of targeted children's novelties marketing.

The show's plot regularly hinged on elements such as misplaced earrings. Overall, fine jewelry was key in defining the leading family's societal position of power and authority--a model for American royalty and a supporting statement of the substantial importance of luxury accessories for the affluent.

The vampire's ring, in 9-carat rose gold and onyx.

Needless to say, I was thrilled to learn that British designer Stephen Einhorn was unveiling a bespoke collection for Burton's film. Einhorn created pieces for the vampire's love-nemesis, Angelique the witch, as well as the vampire himself, among others. 

"I had to make two different sized rings for Johnny Depp's character, as Tim Burton and Johnny Depp liked it so much they wanted it to be worn throughout the film--one for his extended finger and one to wear over his gloves," he explains.

Popular culture reference is critical in establishing and defining the meaning of our product. Four decades ago, there was no question as to the desirability of fine jewelry and its position in the cultural mindset as a symbol of elite status. Royalty and captains of industry naturally embraced it as core to their lifestyles and images. Today, we are the stewards of this heritage and must keep a keen eye toward supplying anything that may sully its image with a strategically placed stake to the heart.

 

Ship to store

Could this be the panacea for multi-channel retailing that fine jewelry has been seeking?

Over the past decade, we've all watched as online retailing has mushroomed around us. But our product, even for mega-powerful, uber-traffic retailers like Amazon, Walmart and jewelry-specific Blue Nile, has faced extraordinary resistance.

While jewelry consumers have proven keen on educating themselves pre-purchase on the Web, they're still much less willing to buy there, speaking on a macro-level. Factors involved include the emotial quotient of buying jewelry, the relative rarity of buying it vis-a-vis other consumer goods, size of ticket, and fashion/style concerns.

Across all consumer categories, however, we've seen strength flow to companies that can optimize the consumer experience across the online and physical store channels. Most recently, the race has gone to companies that provide their "guests" an accessible and highly functional mobile shopping option.

While not new, "ship to store" has become an integral component of mobile shopping. That makes sense, since it combines the end-user advantages of both channels. Shoppers avoid the hassle of schlepping to and through the physical store, employing the convenience of click-through browsing on their device of choice. Yet they retain a face-to-face fallback at the retailer's physical location in case products fall short of expectations.

Sound sensible for fine jewelry? You bet. And while this opens all sorts of possibilities for big companies like chain jeweler Zale, whose CEO called the tactic out in a recent earnings call , it also provides opportunities for independents. Suppliers are increasingly able to provide jewelers site-embedded tools and similar options for presenting jewelry to consumers.

And while there are certainly times you want your customers shopping physically in your store, there are many who would prefer doing the legwork online and visiting only when their chosen jewelry arrives. This can take the headache out of the shopping process, especially for men. And it's hard to argue that easier shopping won't mean increased sales.

The future of the meaning of ‘conflict’

It didn’t take very long after the World Diamond Council (WDC) and the Kimberley Process (KP) expressed their support for broadening the definition of “conflict” diamond for the first sign of resistance to surface.

The day after the news emerged from Vicenza, The Times of India ran a story stating the Indian gems and jewelry industry is ready to “lock its horns” over the proposal. An unidentified “senior functionary” from India’s Gems and Jewellery Export Promotion Council (GJEPC) interviewed by the Times is quoted as stating the U.S. is trying to “control” the KP, including African countries such as Zimbabwe, by “implementing such vicious laws.”

“Indian industry will oppose it tooth and nail,” the unnamed source said.

(Another interesting note from the Times story is that it states that “leaders of the industry” oppose the U.S.’s plan to establish a permanent administrative office for the KP. I didn’t know establishing a permanent secretarial-type body for the process -- which seems both logical and benign -- was that controversial. Who is opposed to this and why?)

While I know this is just one article that was not particularly well written (see: the huge factual error in the fifth graph regarding the U.S.’s involvement in the origin of the KP), it did bring to the forefront a question that had been lingering in my mind: How much support, outside of the KP chairwoman and the WDC, neither of whom gets a vote, does a broader definition of conflict have?

It’s a change that definitely needs to happen and one that some say is the most pressing need for the KP right now. As it stands, the process defines conflict, or “blood” diamonds, as rough stones that are used by rebel movements to fund wars against legitimate governments. Calls are to broaden that definition to include diamonds that are linked to violence of any kind.

As we all know, the KP requires complete consensus to pass any issue. All it takes is one country saying “no” to prevent change from taking place.

“We’ll see,” one industry player commented when I asked him about the proposal’s chance of passing.

He says the intersessional, scheduled to take place June 4 to 7 in Washington, will be very telling of which members are on board with revising the definition of conflict diamonds and which ones aren’t.

He does note, however, that having a country as powerful as the United States backing a broader definition of conflict --and serving as KP chair--does help, as does having a seasoned ambassador who is “very well liked” (at least in the U.S.) as the process’ official chairwoman.

“People listen,” when the United States speaks, he said.

The participants might listen, indeed, but how they will vote remains the big question.

Kinetically speaking, these rings move

I made a visit to the Aaron Faber Gallery on Fifth Avenue earlier this month, having received an invitation to preview the jewelry of designers from Quebec. While many of the designs were creative, innovative and fresh, the creations of one particular designer caught my eye--Claudio Pino.

Pino’s rings are miniature works of architecture that incorporate movement into geometric shapes. Aptly named the Kinetic Rings Collection, the pieces I saw incorporate 14-karat gold, silver and gemstones.

“In this collection, I add meticulous mechanisms to give the stone set the freedom to follow the owner’s movements, reflecting the wearer in many small, intricate ways,” Pino said. “My rings come alive only when they find their owners.”


Pino’s “Infinity” ring is made in 14-karat gold and sterling silver with moonstone, diamonds and ruby.

I was skeptical when I first saw Pino’s rings--the rounded gemstones set into the bottom of the lower shank of the band and seemingly sharp edges of the design had me thinking it might be an uncomfortable piece of jewelry to wear. But I couldn’t have been more wrong; each ring was extremely comfortable and wearable, forming perfectly to the movements of my hand and fingers.

“During the creative process, I never forget that someone will be wearing the ring,” Pino said. “Therefore, rings first need to be very comfortable and belong to the hand.”

Pino’s “Metamorphosis” ring is made in sterling silver and 14-karat gold with moonstone, pearls, turquoise, prehnite and amethyst.

The designer also told me he draws from a wealth of inspiration for his creations, from the aurora borealis to ancient Egypt, carefully constructing which gemstones are paired with one another in each ring.

“I juxtapose cold silver to the warm gold, calm green emeralds to vivid red rubies, to the hue of the charm and freshness of whitewater pearls,” he said. “Each design portrays a slice of life.”


Pino’s Cereus ring is made in 14-karat gold with opal, tanzanite, blue diamonds and pearls.

While speaking with Pino, his enthusiasm and belief in his designs was refreshing. He wasn’t talking about carat weight, facets, or the price of his pieces--he spoke about inspiration, symbolism, and most importantly, the wearers of his rings.

“As symbols of love, representations of victories and demonstrations of power, rings are the most personal and evocative pieces of jewelry,” he said. “Having a gem connected to one’s own body movements and having it associated with one’s personal appearance is alone an interesting subject of investigation.”


Pino’s Vena Amoris ring is made in 18-karat gold and sterling silver with topaz.

Additional information about Claudio Pino can be found on his website here.

More palatable metals

The past few years have marked a love-hate relationship between jewelers and precious metals. On one hand, nearly everyone profited from rising prices by buying from the public, a lucrative practice that helped keep many afloat during the darkest days.

Conversely, high metals prices can make the actual practice of retailing fine jewelry a significant challenge. The definition of fine jewelry is a simple one: jewelry constituted of precious components. And those are few. In metals, it's gold, platinum and--increasingly recently--silver. In stones, it's diamonds, rubies, sapphires, emeralds, pearls and perhaps a few others. That's our spectrum. So when gold and platinum went astronomical, we suffered.

Now, however, several factors are adding up to mitigate the problem. First, and most obvious, metals prices have come down. Just a few weeks ago, gold broke through $1,900 an ounce, and the bugs were making claims for $2,000 and well beyond. Today, however, we're back in the mid-$1,500s. Platinum is even a hundred bucks cheaper. Historically, these remain high prices. But the trending vector portends more realistic levels.

The second factor stems from ourselves. Designers and manufacturers have developed styles and techniques to increasingly maximize appeal and aesthetics of pieces with less metal content. Moreover, an increasing focus on colored stones amplifies this factor. For one thing, colored stones offer greater margin than diamonds, which are more commoditized. And for another, the more expensive the stone used in a piece, the less influential the metals price is in affecting the final price tag, simply because it represents a relatively smaller percentage of overall value.

Finally, there's an economic factor at play, too. Inflation hasn't hit just precious metals over the past few years. We all drive, for example, and share the pain each time we fill the tank. But food, clothing--necessities as well as luxuries--all have seen prices increase substantially. Bottom line is that, after several years of this, consumers' expectations of pricing levels have essentially been reset. We've complained all along. But at this point, few shoppers are shocked that things cost more. Sometimes a lot more.

That makes expensive jewelry relatively more palatable. All in all, then, as we approach the main open to buy period of the 2012 business cycle, precious metals may be turning the corner from a sell recommendation to a buy.

Celebrity Jewelry Gawk™ - Spring Bling

Although awards season has ended, the arrival of spring calls for its own red carpet events--movie and television premieres, charity events, even a high-profile political dinner--and a chance for the stars to debut their newest, most glamorous baubles.

Blue-toned jewels are continuing to be a favorite in celebrity jewelry, with pink and yellow hues spotted as well. Long drop earrings and vibrant cocktail rings remain a staple with the stars, both with gemstones and large or pavé diamonds.

Here’s the best in celebrity jewelry seen in the past month.

Carmen Electra (below) wore a bevy of Isharya jewelry to her 40th birthday party, held at the Crazy Horse III in Las Vegas this month. Electra wore the brand’s gemstone Libra earrings in labradorite and green chalcedony ($375), Nile Nymph Libra necklace with blue chalcedony ($458) and Lotus resin ring ($135).









Kelly Osbourne wore Vanessa Leu’s 18-karat black gold ring with red rutilated quartz and black pavé diamonds (below, $12,800) to a BritWeek benefit for the Children’s Hospital Los Angeles this month.


Ivanka Trump (below) wore her own signature oval diamond earrings and pavé diamond oval link bracelet, both in 18-karat white gold, to the 98th Annual White House Correspondents’ Dinner on April 28.






Elizabeth Hurley (below) wore Tresor’s Mosaico rose quartz and gold micron earrings ($625) to the Breast Cancer Research Foundation’s 2012 Hot Pink Party at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York City on April 30.



Cameron Diaz wore Kimberly McDonald’s opal and brown diamond ring set in 18-karat rose gold (below) to press appearances for the film What to Expect When You’re Expecting in Los Angeles.


Julia Louis-Dreyfus (below) attended the premiere of the HBO show Veep wearing geode diamond-shaped five-stone earrings ($5,200) and a 24-karat gold and crystal Zen square ring ($3,100) by Pippa Small Jewellery.






American Idol contestant Joshua Ledet wore a Christian Tse zultanite watch (below) while performing on the show.


Elise Testone, another American Idol contestant, wore Christian Tse’s blue slice sapphire earrings (below, top) and Erica Courtney’s 18-karat gold and diamond yellow beryl Sunburst ring (below, bottom) while performing on the show.




Leighton Meester (below) wore Harry Winston’s platinum and diamond feather ring to the grand opening of the designer’s Shanghai Pavilion, the largest Harry Winston salon in the world, last month.



Viola Davis wore De Beers’ 18-karat yellow gold oval diamond bangle with yellow diamond pavé (below, $5,200) to the 98th Annual White House Correspondents’ Dinner.


Jaime King (below) wore the Pearl Collective’s black freshwater pearl Spike earrings while out in New York City on May 6 and 7.




Susan Foster’s handmade yellow and gray double diamond slice drop necklace trimmed with black diamond micro pavé (below, $14,000) was recently featured on Gossip Girl’s April 30th episode.


Scarlett Johansson wore Van Cleef & Arpels’ “Volutes” between-the-finger diamond ring, set in 18-karat white gold, to the premiere of The Avengers.

Watch out, I’m using tools

Last week was Madison Avenue Watch Week here in New York, a seven-day stretch dedicated to showcasing and recognizing the work of watchmakers and the high-end timepiece brands that line Madison Avenue.

As part of the week’s festivities, I took part in a mechanical watch-making workshop at the Peninsula Hotel, organized by the Swiss watch industry’s Fondation de la Haute Horlogerie (FHH).

I must admit I had my doubts before heading into the class.

I don’t have an exceptionally steady hand, probably due to the three cups of black tea I consume throughout the day. Also, as has been mentioned before in this blog, my vision is not the best to begin with, and staring at a computer screen for 10 hours a day hasn’t helped; I now have prescription computer glasses and am pretty sure I’m on my way to needing bifocals.

Suffice it to say, I didn’t think watch-making would be my strong suit, and I wondered if I’d even make it through the entire class. I honestly was nervous about the whole experience.

The movement we disassembled and then re-assembled was, as the wonderful instructors from FHH told us, an ETA (Unitas) 6497-1, produced between 1967 and 1985.

One very intelligent tip I received when disassembling the watch was to keep the parts together that belonged together.

The 36.6 mm hand-wound mechanical movement (below, right) has 78 parts, 17 jewels and a 46-hour power reserve with off-center seconds at 9 o’clock. As mechanical watch movements go, this is a pretty simple one, perfect practice for people who are learning.

Despite my nerves, and the cup of Earl Grey tea I consumed just prior to the class, I did better than I thought I would.

One of the hardest parts of the class for me, as well as many others, was putting back into place a part called the yoke spring. Yet with some help from an FHH instructor I managed to get the spring back into place without losing it.

Not having the steadiest hand (see tea reference above), I also scratched up the movement quite a bit when try to remove and then re-set the screws. This would never be allowed for a true watchmaker. We were told that any movement that gets scratched is considered damaged.

While out for drinks on Friday night, I was telling a watch-loving friend of mine about my experience (this is a 33-year-old woman with a passion for watches; retailers, take note). She has her dad’s old Rolex and was telling me how expensive it is to get the watch fixed.

After spending three hours learning how to assemble one simple movement, it is easy to see why.

Facebook and the dangers of ‘TMI’

A recent Associated Press article ignited debate over employers asking for potential employees’ social media passwords, the combination of letters and numbers that open the door to the presumably personal worlds of accounts on sites such as Facebook and Twitter.

The report set off a flurry of privacy-minded legislative action since first appearing in March. In April, Maryland became the first state to pass a law banning employers from asking for social media passwords; the bill is awaiting the governor’s signature.

Legislation also is being considered in a number of other states, including Minnesota, Illinois, California and Washington, and is under review on the federal level.

In addition, Facebook slammed the practice, noting in a blog by Chief Privacy Officer Erin Egan that it’s actually a violation of Facebook’s “Statement of Rights and Responsibilities” to share or solicit a Facebook password.

To begin with, it's worth noting that nobody is really certain how many private-sector employers are requesting applicants’ Facebook passwords or “shoulder-surfing,” asking an applicant log into their account during an interview in order to peek at their profile. (The AP report does note that the practice is utilized more for public sector positions, such as police officer or 911 dispatcher.)

After the AP story ran, a blog on U.S. News & World Report said that this perceived password-privacy invasion was, in reality, “extremely rare.” Wired also questioned how widespread the practice really is.

The attorneys I spoke to had differing opinions on its pervasiveness.

Joy R. Butler, a Washington-based attorney whose area of practice includes Internet law, said she has heard a number of anecdotes about employers implementing password-asking practices, particularly in the public sector. It has spilled over into the private sector as well, though Butler says she doesn’t have any statistics on exactly how widespread it is.

“I think it’s not being blown out of proportion. It’s a matter that needs to be addressed,” she says.

Conversely, Alastair Gamble, of Phoenix law firm Lewis and Roca LLP, says he has a sense the practice is not used as widely as the media might lead people to believe, though he allows that, “It may be going on all the time and I don’t know about it.”

One point that both attorneys agree on, however, is that employers need to tread very carefully when factoring social media into the hiring process. Don’t delve into potential employees’ social media accounts on any level unless you have a solid, documented reason for doing so, they say.

Gamble says to him, the largest potential problem is that it makes employers privy to information such as a person’s sexual orientation, religion and marital status--factors that, by law, cannot be considered in the hiring process. “All of those things might be at the forefront of somebody’s Facebook page,” he says.

If an employer decides not to hire someone after looking at their Facebook page and learning that, for example, they are Muslim or gay, they open themselves up to a potential lawsuit, even if those factors didn’t play a role in their decision.

To try to avoid liability, Gamble says he advises his clients, instead of relying on Facebook, follow up with references, perform a criminal background check and/or institute a longer interview process.

Butler brings up another interesting angle--that having additional information about a potential employee puts the employer at risk because it gives them access to too much information.

This is a state better known in this heyday of Internet slang as “TMI.”

The more employers know, the more they can be held liable for if something goes amiss with a new hire. Without access to Facebook, the universe of information that the employer could know about their employees “shrinks a little bit,” she says.

The Swiss Guard

Lots of talk cropping up again about the "Swiss-made" label. As most in our business are aware, there are set criteria for determining what level of “Swiss” labeling manufacturers can claim for their watches. Like other magazines, we publish and discuss those on a fairly regular basis, especially at the beginning of the year, around the time the BaselWorld timepiece lollapalooza heats up.

These rules are taking on a greater significance now, however, since 1. Bienne-based Swatch Group--umbrella manufacturer of nearly two dozen brands--decided to begin decreasing its supply of components to competitors and 2. On the political-economy level, Swiss politicians and businessmen themselves are publicly reconsidering and debating the very concept of “Swissness.” Because Swiss-made status is determined by a combination of component origins as well as where units are ultimately assembled, maintaining Swiss status has and will continue to become increasingly difficult for non-Swatch brands.

As on many issues, the whole idea of “Swiss-made” generates a host of conflicting opinions. At one extreme, there are those who consider the whole thing to ring of elitism. On the other, there are many--perhaps even most--who recognize the system’s value.

From a broad perspective, watches are somewhat of an antiquated product. We’re surrounded today by innumerable gizmos that not only tell us the time, but add a legion of functionality that not even the most ambitious of grand complication watches could ever hope to match. More and more, the real value of watches resides in their roles as conceptual fashion accessories. They’re man-jewelry, making statements about personal tastes and denoting identification characteristics from economic status to lifestyle preferences.

Further, like classic cars—physically and psychologically a very similar contemporary collector and investment category—much of the attraction of top-end brands lies in their levels of mechanical precision and performance. Often, it’s a workmanship issue. In a world where so much seems so often to go so wrong, a highly accurate mechanical watch can stand as a symbol of the human potential to forge order from chaos.

In a global culture that teeters increasingly toward the politically correct, many would agree that it’s a vast pleasure to find oneself in the purely absolute: i.e. This is good, period. And while there are always the unscrupulous who would seek to demean watches by stretching or outright cheating in describing their origins, it is clear that true value for luxury timepieces--and their reputations--resides with those who would defend an immutable set of defined quality standards.

Diamonds, the new safe haven?

Major changes are afoot at the world’s largest diamond miners: De Beers, BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto. After 80 years in the business, the Oppenheimer family likely will be out of the diamond trade by years’ end. Both BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto have said they want to exit as well.

Amid all this, there is growing chatter about the rise of diamond investment funds, a topic that always sparks debate among jewelers, manufacturers and the like.

In a recent column, IDEX Online’s Edahn Golan said that he expects to see diamond funds and other forms of investment in diamonds begin operations within the year. He reiterated that same point when quoted in a story called “Diamonds as a Commodity” (which led with the question, “Could diamonds be the new gold?”) published by The New York Times on Friday.

The idea of diamond investment funds is one that has been talked about since I started working at National Jeweler more than four years ago. But is now the time for it to happen? 

As noted above, there are major changes taking place in the industry. Though it has been said that it will be “business as usual” at De Beers, Anglo American is bound to have a different take on the business once the Oppenheimers are gone. While there has been much speculation about the future owners of the diamond mines operated by Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton, the latest reports have named a leveraged buyout firm called Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. as a front-runner in the bidding war.

It’s also worth noting that last May, Harry Winston Diamond Corp., which reportedly also is interested in the diamond assets of BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto, announced that it was teaming up with a company based in Zurich to create a diamond investment fund. (Interestingly, it’s been noted how Harry Winston CEO Robert Gannicott said during the company’s recent conference call that diamonds are “too complex” to be treated as a commodity. Except for when, I guess, Harry Winston wants to treat them that way?)

There’s also the current world economic situation to consider. On Monday evening, I had dinner with an independent jeweler who said he was investing in natural color diamonds because he knows they are going to go up in value, unlike his stagnant stock portfolio, which still is struggling to recover from the beating it took during the downturn.

This retailer has at least one client who feels the same way; the two actually share ownership of a nice yellow diamond, which they (obviously) hope to sell for a profit eventually. And he said he’s interested in investing in more natural color diamonds.

I understand that one jeweler investing in a natural color diamond is not nearly as complex as launching an entire diamond investment fund. But I use this anecdote to make a point: Given all the economic instability in the world, people are looking for somewhere stable to put their money.

Are diamonds going to be it?